WHY DO ATHEISTS & LIBERALS WORSHIP THE GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHERS & ISLAM BUT NOT CHRIST?

Grafix

@JGXdebatePRO

In a single word, mate, your reply is simply 

D   U   M   B
.

Dee

@Grafix

***** Quit trying to re-prosecute old arguments in which you were soundly beaten, hands down.  

 Quit trying to re-prosecute old arguments in which you were soundly beaten, hands down

****You bring them up only to re-prosecute them, because you cannot accept defeat.

You bring them up only to re-prosecute them, because you cannot accept defeat. 

  ***If you can't accept the truth, which unequivocally showed your sources were flawed, your arguments were based on flawed texts, fake history, then I say again, you are beyond help and just a little maggot caught in their dung heap of deception and iniquitous intent - to wipe out Christianity - you the unwitting foot-soldier happily marching along doing their stinking bidding.

*If you can't accept the truth, which unequivocally showed your sources were flawed, your arguments were based on flawed texts, fake history, then I say again, you are beyond help and just a little maggot caught in their dung heap of deception and iniquitous intent - to wipe out Islam  - you the unwitting foot-soldier happily marching along doing their stinking bidding.



****OK.  If you wish, compare the crusades with the destruction, slaughter, slavery, rape and forcing of Christian women into harems for sex-slavery then watch the damned video.

I only compare to demonstrate Christianity win the slaughter , rape and pillage contest hands down 

  
****Go right ahead.  Watch the video if you want accredited and authenticated sources - original Islamic texts boasting about their conquests.  

 
****Go right ahead.  Watch the video if you want accredited and authenticated sources - original Islamic texts boasting about their conquests.  

It’s all flawed texts, fake history 

****The argument of this topic is already on this page.  Why haven't you responded to it?  Respond to it or STFU.  Here it is again ...


*The counter to your argument of this topic is already on this page.  Why haven't you responded to it?  Respond to it or STFU.  

Dee

@Grafix

In a single word, Grafix your reply is simply 

D   U   M   B
.

Grafix

@JGXdebatePRO + @Dee

To the both of you.  In a single word, your replies are simply 

D   U   M   B

__________

Rebut my post.  You don't.  You just make empty claims.  No substantiation.  No evidence in support of your claims.  Nothing.  They are not rebuttals.  They are fake, inculcated ignorance


W H A T    D O    Y O U   T H I N K   T H E    W O R D 

"U N W I T T I N G L Y"

M E A N S    A S    U S E D    I N    M Y    T E X T    A B O V E ?
.

JGXdebatePRO

I have, and successfully, at that. I have proven that you're claims are illogical as you say "Satan this, Burn in hell that" but the one who has no evidence is YOU.

JGXdebatePRO

I have, and successfully, at that. I have proven that you're claims are illogical as you say "Satan this, Burn in hell that" but the one who has no evidence is YOU.

Dee

@Grafix

Calm down , I know you’re a Catholic  lighten up kid ........

Grafix

@JGXdebatePRO

I've never said "burn in Hell" to a single soul.  I disagree with such language.  I simply identify who are Satan's agents, as Christ instructed us to discern. None of us may judge another's soul.  Jesus specifically instructed us that we must not.  Where are your rebuttals to the content of the videos, then? There are none.   Where are your rebuttals to this below?  There are none.  As I said, making an unsupported claim with no evidence or argument to prove and support it, is not a rebuttal.  It is what it is - a hollow claim.  That's all you have provided, just hollow claims and you are still doing it in your claims that you have rebutted my arguments.  Where?

Grafix said:
@MayCaesar ; with cc to  - @TGMasterX +  @piloteer +  @JGXdebatePRO +  @xlJ_dolphin_473 +  @Dee +  @RickeyD + @Happy_Killbot

I see.  I gave you enough rope to prove yourself, but yet you fall back into more of the same.  You refuse to watch the videos, no matter how many times I urge you to do so.  They're on topic.  You refuse to come back to the topic, in spite of many requests that you do so.  You refuse to answer the question I put in front of you, THREE  times now, which reflects the topic title.  You refuse to debate on-topic at all, in spite of repeated requests, even after being told in no uncertain terms to STFU, if you can't stay on topic, but do you?   Your persistent resistance points to some kind of deluded derangement. 

Atheism pretends it holds some kind of elusive "intellectual" higher ground.  Where is it?  Where's yours?  You can't even stay on topic, let alone stay out of the rhetorical gutter.  If it were only you, I would have no point, but it's not only you.  It's true of every Atheist I've ever had a discussion with.  They're ignoramuses on every subject.  Every  subject.  They have no scholarship of their own to claim.  There's no "intellectualism" in Atheism at all.   Atheism borrows its pseudo "intellectualism" by deferring to the intellectual endeavour of the Greco-Roman philosophers and the dubious "scholarship" of early Islam, but has none of its own, nor any philosophy of its own.  A blank page.  It has no ethos.  A blank page.  It has no ideology.  A blank page.  It has no history.  A blank page.  It has no scholars.  A blank page.  It is a fraud.  A croc.   A lie.  A deceit.  A double blind.

So what is the purpose of this double blind?  It claims it is a column of smoke, a nothing, with a single belief - that there is no God - yet we know it has a mission, a mission about which it is extremely zealous, so zealous it cannot repress its rabid bigotry, unsurpassed by any other group.  It never shuts up about it and invests billions, funding people like Dawk Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the like.  Why? ... funding their every move, their every speaking tour, their accommodation, their venues, their meal tickets, their flights, their hire cars, while pretending to be nothing, just a benign column of smoke of nothing.  So what's going on?  Well, the Genie is out of the bottle.  You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.  Atheism is a brother in arms with Islam.  They are peas from the same pod.  How?

Just like Islam, it's purpose is political, political narcissism of the worst kind, just like Islam's political narcissism.  Neither of them are what they pretend to be.  Both are insidious deceptions, with exactly the same mission, using a fake identity to conceal their mission.  Islam was never a religion, least of all of the Abrahamic stock.  It slaughters, rapes, beheads and enslaves with great vengeance and unbridled delight all and any who identify with the Abrahamic religion.  So how has it claimed this completely fake croc for so many centuries and even convinced the West to teach this croc, that it is one of "three" religions which belong to the Abrahamic belief system?  Islam has a multi-billion dollar budget invested in this propaganda, a globally orchestrated, well-funded inculcation, networked across the entire world for centuries, destroying all classical scholarship which exposed it.  

Atheism does the same with an identical modus operandi.  Mohammed needed a Cause Célèbre  to amass a following through whom to wage war, conquest, subjugation and power.  Atheism, similarly, with its fake cover of nothingness, has built a multi-billion dollar network to become a political power through Communism.  Both must eradicate Christianity before they can hope to succeed.  It stands in their way.  This is why I cannot get a single Atheist in this forum to watch the videos on the bloody slaughter-crazed depraved history of Islam.  It is why not one of you will enumerate a single one of Islam's atrocities.  You are all frauds.  Every single one of you.  Despicable liars.  Cheats.  Villains.  Vehicles of Satan.  What's worse, most of you in ignorance, are not even aware that you are.  Ignorance is Atheism's flagship.  If you were not ignorant, you would never support it.
.

piloteer

 @Grafix

Bwaaaahahahahah, you  f u c k i n  RUBE!!!!!

I knew you wouldn't be able to demonstrate what philosophical insights the bible has to offer. In all fairness though, you're about as adept as a genetically deficient rat who's just been hit by a moving Christian camp bus to demonstrate the supposed philosophical insights of the bible. You certainly wouldn't make it onto any short lists for possible candidates of representatives of supposed Christian philosophy. Exactly what is it about the bible,  or anything for that matter that you have studied.?       

Lets go over the answers you had to demonstrate the philosophy in Christian teachings. Spoiler alert, it's a dumpster fire.

I asked:   

Are our personalities formed by natural circumstances, or are our personalities formed by a social upbringing?   

You answered: 

******"Neither.  One's personality is genetically inherited.  However, undue hardship, undue pressures, undue catastrophes and trials and tribulations can manifest in excesses, which were inherently dormant in the genes and which may never have manifested themselves but for such afflictions, which ultimate manifestation can appear as personality disorders, shaped by circumstance, but the proclivity to react in a certain way is nevertheless inherently genetic, because different people react differently to the same things, which proves that.  Science has in any case proved that personality is genetically inherited."******

Neither?!?!? Really?!?!? Did you have an understanding of the question at hand? First off, if our genetic makeup is a natural occurrence that forms our personalities, and that natural occurrence has nothing to do with social factors that form our personalities, then what you are actually arguing is that our personalities are formed by natural occurrences. You haven't argued that our personalities are formed by neither "nature" or "nurture", you have solidly argued that it is indeed nature and you claim this is backed by science. Leave us not forget that you've done nothing to demonstrate where Christian teachings fall on this issue. But don't fret, it's because there simply is none, because Christianity is not a philosophy, it's a religious based faith.

Next I asked:

What is the nature of our universe according to Christian doctrine? Do we live in a materialistic universe, or do we live in an idealistic universe according to Christian doctrine? 

Your "answer" was:

 *******"Christian doctrine does not teach that we live in an idealistic universe.  I am a scholar of Christianity and have no clue as to what that even means.  It is not what Christianity teaches."***

You are correct about absolutely everything you've said here. None of this philosophical query is covered by Christian doctrine. Christian doctrine does not teach that we live in an idealistic universe. It also doesn't teach that we live in a materialistic universe,  because like I've stated before, there is no philosophy to be had in Christian doctrine. You go on to say that you have no clue what an idealistic universe even is (how shocking ). Then you answered why you don't know at the beginning of that very same sentence, because you claimed you were a "scholar of Christianity".

In all fairness though, you obviously have no understanding of anything philosophical to begin with. Or anything for that matter, so you are a terrible representative of the supposed philosophy of Christian doctrine. There actually are true Christian scholars who may be able to show us biblical texts that do have some insight into this philosophical query. I've read several books by Doug Erlandson who is a Christian scholar with an in-depth understanding of philosophy. Most of his books are free on kindle. Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the basics before you crown yourself a valid "scholar of Christian doctrine".

Next question: 

Why is murder wrong? Did "God" create the universe in accordance with the moral truth that murder is wrong, or is murder wrong because "God" says it is? 

Your answer was"

***"Now you move into philosophical opinion in the hope of proving Christianity wrong.  I thought you said Christianity had no philosophy?  This very question proves it does.  The Christian philosophy is simple, but packed with wisdom.  It is this.  If a society does not set for itself a basic pillar of foundational morals, accepted and adhered to by the whole of society, then it will fall into decay.  That's its fundamental philosophy.  The question of whether murder is wrong, or rape, or incest, bestiality, or theft, extortion or deception, infidelity or licentiousness, etc. all fall under the same moral purview.  They cause harm to others and harm causes discord with hurt.  Hurt produces undisciplined counter-reactions, which in turn create strife and which in turn can ultimately lead to civil unrest and crimes, the beginning of the decay of any society.  This is the philosophy of Christianity, although you claim one doesn't exist.  Whether these moral codes come from God or elsewhere matters not.  The point is that Christianity insists on a moral compass to prevent social discord as a defence against social decay, because it acknowledges the wisdom of such.  Who or where these come from is another debate altogether, i.e., whether God exists - irrelevant here."****
------------------------


So I guess that because I asked that question, it proves Christian doctrine does have philosophical insights?!?!?!? Does that mean it didn't it have any philosophical insights before I asked the question, or does it mean that you have absolutely no idea about any kind of philosophical insights that can be found in the bible? I have an assumption as to what the answer is to that question. The philosophical question about murder is a retooling of Euthypros dilemma which is found in Plato's dialogue Euthypro. Plato was a Grecian philosopher, which was well within the range of time when the first and second testaments of scripture was being written, so you'd think that if there were any philosophical retorts from Christian teachings that address this query, they'd be front and center from such an esteemed "Christian scholar" such as yourself. And yet we have absolutely nothing from you that can be considered a biblical answer to this question. Again, I wonder if it's just a lack of understanding on your part, or it's because no answer is to be had from the bible. 

Last question:

The bible claims that God grants us all free will, but if everything happens according to God's plan, and God already knows everything that will happen, how can it not be predetermined? If it is predetermined by God, how can it be free will?  

You answered?!?!?

******"Again sustained inculcation of lies and deceptions lead you up the garden path, the reason Christianity abhors atheism.  It is an orchestrated deception promulgating misinformation as just demonstrated.  You think you know the definition of "God's Plan" and base your question on an erroneous understanding of it, an understanding inculcated by your unholy religion of atheism.  God's Plan is not to control our destiny.  God's plan is not to control anything at all.  God's Plan has nothing to do with control.  God's Plan is the opposite of control.  Satan teaches that fallacy, through his false prophet of atheism and others.  God's plan is for the faithful and only for the faithful, those who demonstrate that they are faithful, that they may receive the gift of eternal life and live on the face of this earth forever in harmony, peace, knowledge and love for one another to enjoy a subliminal existence.  Those who do not wish to be a part of that plan are free to reject it, because God gave them the free will to do so.

If the future and our own personal futures were pre-determined by God, then why would He want all the strife and hurt, He being a benevolent and loving God?  Why would He allow a persona such as Satan = the temptation to do wrong and harm others, even exist?  The concept allows that God could wipe out Satan in a jiff.  If God chose to put his thumb on everything and to control the outcome, why would He allow the shocking suffering in our world?  He doesn't create that.  Satan does.  God gave everyone free will, including Satan.  Satan chose to defy God. God banished him and bound him to the earth.

Your argument is unintelligent and shows just why the Christian philosophy is streaks ahead of the dumb atheist philosophy.  In your blinkered state and dulled mental capacity, you are unable to appreciate that just because God is omniscient - (all knowing, all wise and sees and knows all in advance) - does not demand that he must by natural progression, therefore control our destiny, every choice we make and every thought we have.  Knowing the future does not need to be bolted to controlling it.  It is simply knowledge, with a hands-off approach, giving each of us the free will to control our own destinies.  If God sought to control everything, there would be no Atheists.  There would be no Islam, etc.  No wars.  No crucifixions, not even of Himself".*****
______________________________________________


So I guess you're saying that God does not know the future, and cannot guarantee his plan will come to fruition. In fact, you seem to have not addressed the part about how God knows the future which is demonstrated in Isaiah 41. God claims that he alone is in CONTROL of world history. If you have any biblical scripture that God doesn't have any control of world history or our personal futures, you haven't shown any of us here. In fact, you haven't cited a single thing from the bible, so all we have to go on is the ranting of a genetically deficient rat who's just been hit by a moving Christian camp bus. 

Can you for just one time pretend you are conscious, and stop living up to our expectations of you? Seriously. Did you put any thought into what you've just said here? Are you really happy with any of this being that you are a "Christian  scholar"? Did your mother have any children that lived? Stop pretending you are anything more than a  f u c k i n  RUBE!!! Maybe you should just get back to your meth lab and country music and let the big people tackle the big issues. Thanx.  

          FAILLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!



          

          

   

Dee

@Grafix

Grafix

@Dee -  LOL!  This is a rebuttal?   A photograph of a clergyman?   All out of aces, you descend into the rhetorical gutter, the cess pit of ad hominem, attempting to goad me into revealing my denomination of faith.  This is about your fourth attempt to prise that out of me, Dee.  Why should it even matter to you, Nosey Britches?  It's none of your business and has no relevance to the debate at all.  If you could only learn to debate objectively, and learn to focus on the content and the substance of the debate, it would make you smarter and a better person.  Instead, you are a walking wall of woeful words with nothing to say, always personalizing the discussion.  

I'll never tell the likes of you, Dee, which faith I subscribe to.  Never, because you do stuff like you just demonstrated.  You seek to weaponize it against your opponents, to victimize and vilify them, to polarize and paralyze them.  You do realize that's a Marxist protocol? It's in the Marxist Alinsky's Rules For Radicals, the reason you so desperately wish to know.  You have no clue and you never will.  It is for me to know and for you to never find out.  

N O W   D E B A T E   T H E   T O P I C    O R   F O R E V E R   H O L D    Y O U R   P E A C E

.

Dee

@Grafix

You’re too ashamed to even admit you’re a Catholic I feel your pain buddy ......

Grafix

Want me to agree with you?  I do on that one.  That includes the British Monarchy too, which is the Head of the Anglican Church worldwide.

N O W    D E B A T E    T H E    T O P I C  O R   S T F U

I will not respond further, Dee, unless you debate the topic at hand
.

Dee

@piloteer

Ha, Ha great piece, he gets all girly and embarrassed at his Catholicism and you’re spot on he’s a bumpkin , his hobby is most likely playing the jug while his wife ( first cousin, one toothed) looks on with moist eyes 

Dee

@Grafix

Grafix

@piloteer - LOL!  Your first para eclipses my literary style by far.  I am sitting here shaking with laughter.  Love the ... what was it ....  "hit by a moving Christian camp bus".  I hope it was a straight bus.  LOL!

Seriously!  You opine my not belonging to the leftie Luddite law of language.  LOL!   Unsure of the definition of your parvenu style, with the phoney intellectual "natural circumstances" shite, I deduced, (wrongly it seems) that any "normy" would simply have used the term "genetic" if they meant that.  As you didn't use the obvious term, "genetic", I deduced you must mean some other dip-shite quirk that did not apply to the Christian lexicon.  Why for f**ck sake can't Lefties speak normally?  Because they aren't normal.  

Next you argue this fizzled fire cracker, that Christianity does not teach that "we live in a materialistic universe". Huh?  Did I really say that?  Don't think so, Sunshine.  I said that we teach the universe according to the science of astro-physics.  That's teaching the universe is a very real  and material entity, via the scientific knowledge of it, but let's put your lie on full display ....

Christian doctrine does not teach that we live in an idealistic universe. It also doesn't teach that we live in a materialistic universe,  because like I've stated before, there is no philosophy to be had in Christian doctrine. You go on to say that you have no clue what an idealistic universe even is (how shocking ). Then you answered why you don't know at the beginning of that very same sentence, because you claimed you were a "scholar of Christianity".

I note your use the word "materialistic" to describe the universe.  That's no what "materialistic" means, Einstein.  It is a MATERIAL universe, which Christianity teaches it to be.  LOL!  Then you take me to task for not knowing what the leftie language of "an idealistic universe" even means, yet do not bother to explain what you  mean by this ridiculous term, given that our universe is very real and for the life of me, I have never heard our universe described as an "idealistic" one in any scholarly definition. All you show interest in is upraiding my common sense, for if we don't teach it, then we don't need to know about your whacko leftie nonsense, do we?  Logical, I would've thought.  You then follow on with a great deal of vitriolic invective which is of no interest to me.  NEXT ...

So I guess you're saying that God does not know the future, and cannot guarantee his plan will come to fruition.

Mate, do you have dyslexia?  I actually said more than once, that God does  know the future, that He is omniscient.  I even gave the definition of that word.  You sure you don't need a trip to your optometrist? 

God has revealed to His prophets the final outcome of the Armageddon.  Through that even we know the future.  God ultimately defeats Satan and his army of little pipers, like you.  It is written.  Why can we trust what is written?  Because EVERY  prophesy in the Biblical Texts, right through from the Old to the New Testament has now been fulfilled, except for the final one, concerning Judgement, yet to happen. 

Even the smallest details in these prophecies are extraordinarily accurate.  Let me give you an example.  The Churches closing their doors on week days, locked, is now a fact and was prophesied. The Catholic wing is even reporting that its lamps signifying Christ's presence have been removed from their altars except when a Mass or service is happening, as prophesied, because in the third world the hosts are stolen for food by the poor, so the Churches have been compelled to remove them from their tabernacles.  The age of the great apostasy, as prophesied and the rise of the anti-Christians is here, the prelude to the Anti-Christ. as prophesied.

Thousands of years before Christ's birth, even it was foretold, even that three wise men would travel to His birthplace was foretold, as attested to on the Herodian public record.  Christ's baptism in the River Jordan was foretold, his crucifixion, his resurrection, even the enslavement of the Hebrews in Babylon, the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD, the occupation of Judah by Rome, then by the Ottomans, all foretold.  All fulfilled, including the realization of their own State and the U.S. Embassy being moved to Jerusalem.  All foretold.  All fulfilled and all dead accurate.  The rebuilding of the third temple is now under way, as prophesied, which will usher in the final days before Judgement, the very last of the prophesies, yet to happen.  With a 100% record of accuracy, why should we doubt the very last prophesy?  We don't. 

Proof texting the Biblical texts with no true knowledge or understanding of the full set of Books never reveal its truths.  It actually misleads Satan's little army deliberately into misinterpretations.  I proved that to Dee and to SkepticalOne with every one of their proof texts, misinterpreted by them.  God will not give the benefit of his teachings to those with the intent of weaponizing his own words against Him. Scholars abhor proof texting the Bible out of context, because it always leads to that.  It was written as a composite teaching.  At least the Chapter prior and after the one being quoted must be understood, but even then that may not provide an accurate understanding.  It requires a deep knowledge of the texts to appreciate the era, the times, the customs, the practices, the language, the terminology, the culture, the geopolitical landscape and the religious landscape.  Without this true knowledge, the words fall like seeds on barren ground, on deaf ears, closed minds and barricaded hearts.    Then you claim this ...

Isaiah 41. God claims that he alone is in CONTROL of world history. If you have any biblical scripture that God doesn't have any control of world history or our personal futures, you haven't shown any of us here. In fact, you haven't cited a single thing from the bible, so all we have to go on is the ranting of a genetically deficient rat who's just been hit by a moving Christian camp bus. 

LOL!  There's that poor wretched bus again.  Firstly, your complete and total misinterpretation of Isaiah is to be expected for the reasons stated in my last para above.  Secondly,  I don't craft my replies to the wants of my inquisitors, if that's what you expect.  I give them according to the truth.  The truth is that the Christian philosophy is so all-encompassing in its wisdom, that it doesn't need to be accredited to anyone, which is what I proved to you, that it can be successfully applied to any society be they believers or non-believers in the Christian God.  That's because it is practical and wise.  If it only worked as a social construct for believers, then where would our society be?  On ditch row I think. 

If I had expressed my belief that these moral codes came from God, you would have mocked my faith and my God.  I instead, showed their value to society, without any reference to their source.  It seems now, that it would not have mattered which way I framed it, you are hell bent on mocking it, anyway.  Damned if I do and damned if I don't.  Right?  You are just all sour grapes because I didn't fall for your little entrapment that you set for me to walk into - all ticked off that you can't mock my God and my faith, which was your intent.  LOL!

Let's get to Isaiah.  You mistake God's command over evil and his punishment and condemnations of such, as control over the world and the future of those in it.  Not so.  God certainly will punish us if we make the wrong choices, but that is the consequence of the path we have already chosen  via our free will.  God controls the consequences.  We bring God's wrath upon our own heads.  God will wipe out nations and entire cities when their iniquity becomes too great and has mightily.  Witness the entire Canaanite nation - disappeared suddenly from the pages of history; Sodom and Gomorrah, their remains ghost-like spectres on desolate plains, which God vowed would never again grow a single blade of grass and they haven't;  the Great Flood, Babylon, etc.  That is the context in which the verses of Isaiah are to be interpreted.  He punishes Israel's enemies.  Enjoy.

  

MayCaesar

Grafix said:

@MayCaesar ; with cc to  - @TGMasterX +  @piloteer +  @JGXdebatePRO +  @xlJ_dolphin_473 +  @Dee +  @RickeyD + @Happy_Killbot

I see.  I gave you enough rope to prove yourself, but yet you fall back into more of the same.  You refuse to watch the videos, no matter how many times I urge you to do so.  They're on topic.  You refuse to come back to the topic, in spite of many requests that you do so.  You refuse to answer the question I put in front of you, THREE  times now, which reflects the topic title.  You refuse to debate on-topic at all, in spite of repeated requests, even after being told in no uncertain terms to STFU, if you can't stay on topic, but do you?   Your persistent resistance points to some kind of deluded derangement. 

Atheism pretends it holds some kind of elusive "intellectual" higher ground.  Where is it?  Where's yours?  You can't even stay on topic, let alone stay out of the rhetorical gutter.  If it were only you, I would have no point, but it's not only you.  It's true of every Atheist I've ever had a discussion with.  They're ignoramuses on every subject.  Every  subject.  They have no scholarship of their own to claim.  There's no "intellectualism" in Atheism at all.   Atheism borrows its pseudo "intellectualism" by deferring to the intellectual endeavour of the Greco-Roman philosophers and the dubious "scholarship" of early Islam, but has none of its own, nor any philosophy of its own.  A blank page.  It has no ethos.  A blank page.  It has no ideology.  A blank page.  It has no history.  A blank page.  It has no scholars.  A blank page.  It is a fraud.  A croc.   A lie.  A deceit.  A double blind.

So what is the purpose of this double blind?  It claims it is a column of smoke, a nothing, with a single belief - that there is no God - yet we know it has a mission, a mission about which it is extremely zealous, so zealous it cannot repress its rabid bigotry, unsurpassed by any other group.  It never shuts up about it and invests billions, funding people like Dawk Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the like.  Why? ... funding their every move, their every speaking tour, their accommodation, their venues, their meal tickets, their flights, their hire cars, while pretending to be nothing, just a benign column of smoke of nothing.  So what's going on?  Well, the Genie is out of the bottle.  You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.  Atheism is a brother in arms with Islam.  They are peas from the same pod.  How?

Just like Islam, it's purpose is political, political narcissism of the worst kind, just like Islam's political narcissism.  Neither of them are what they pretend to be.  Both are insidious deceptions, with exactly the same mission, using a fake identity to conceal their mission.  Islam was never a religion, least of all of the Abrahamic stock.  It slaughters, rapes, beheads and enslaves with great vengeance and unbridled delight all and any who identify with the Abrahamic religion.  So how has it claimed this completely fake croc for so many centuries and even convinced the West to teach this croc, that it is one of "three" religions which belong to the Abrahamic belief system?  Islam has a multi-billion dollar budget invested in this propaganda, a globally orchestrated, well-funded inculcation, networked across the entire world for centuries, destroying all classical scholarship which exposed it.  

Atheism does the same with an identical modus operandi.  Mohammed needed a Cause Célèbre  to amass a following through whom to wage war, conquest, subjugation and power.  Atheism, similarly, with its fake cover of nothingness, has built a multi-billion dollar network to become a political power through Communism.  Both must eradicate Christianity before they can hope to succeed.  It stands in their way.  This is why I cannot get a single Atheist in this forum to watch the videos on the bloody slaughter-crazed depraved history of Islam.  It is why not one of you will enumerate a single one of Islam's atrocities.  You are all frauds.  Every single one of you.  Despicable liars.  Cheats.  Villains.  Vehicles of Satan.  What's worse, most of you in ignorance, are not even aware that you are.  Ignorance is Atheism's flagship.  If you were not ignorant, you would never support it.
.

Atheism is just a notion that there is no reason to believe in god. You are prescribing so many things to us... Grand conspiracies, intellectual higher ground, etc. While all we are saying is just, "I have not seen any evidence for the existence of gods you talk about".

Do you believe you have the intellectual higher ground due to, say, not believing in minotaurs? Of course not; it is an obvious belief given what we know about the world. Well, it is the same with religion. Do you somehow conspire against people believing in minotaurs? No? Well, I take religion about as seriously and have about the same drive to conspire against it.

You think that I have some special feelings towards Christianity. While in reality I just do not care about the ideas it promotes, just like I do not care about the ideas of Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Shin... No, Shintoism is cool. But you get my point.

It is you guys who are constantly making a fuzz about the alleged atheist conspiracies and how we all are going to burn in hell. You yell loud for centuries, then we finally open our mouths to quietly ask you to please be a little bit less loud, and then you throw a fit over being criticised and oppressed... Sounds like all of those politically overly correct people who wander around causing trouble intentionally and seeing every reaction to that as oppression and exploitation.

Christians have committed an unspeakable amount of atrocities throughout the centuries, and still I do not bear any negative feelings towards you guys and respect your beliefs. But that is not enough for you, is it? You want everyone to bow their heads to your deity and join you in your crusade against other world views; merely respecting you and letting you do and say whatever you want is not sufficient to cater to your insecurities.

piloteer

@Grafix

Oh man. This is like explaining walking to someone who just had a stroke. You're a special kind of  s t u p i d,  aren't you Grafix? So I guess the philosophical terms that describe philosophical theories that have been in place since before Christ was alive is now just "liberal terminology". Boy, that must really suck for a RUBE who is trying to demonstrate the philosophy inherent in the bible. This must seem like trying to understand Chinese arithmetic. Practicality has no place in philosophy just like RUBENS have no place in philosophy or debates. I kinda feel bad for you now. Your a little child lost in a world of big people here. I'll help you along.    

Idealist universe. The idea of an idealistic universe was introduced in Greek philosophy by Anaxagoras around 500 BC. Just so we know you're on the same page here, let me explain what BC is, so you get a general idea of what time frame we're looking at here. BC generally means "before Christ". AD is a Latin phrase that generally means "In the year of our Lord". Our calendar is based off of when Jesus Christ is said to have lived. The year zero is when it is generally considered Jesus died (or ascended into heaven if your a mythologist). The years before zero go backward, so the higher the number is, the further back we will be in time. So 500bc would be 500 years before Christ died. An idealistic universe would be a universe that is literally shaped by how we perceive the universe (perceive means understand). Instead of the universe being made of physical stuff, like dust and gasses, it was theorized that the universe was made of our consciousness, or that the universe is held together by our consciousness (consciousness is the thing you don't have). 

Materialistic universe. It is not known when the idea of a materialist universe was first theorized, but it probably predates the idea of a idealist universe. There are some writings that demonstrate the idea of a materialist universe was theorized in India as far back as 800bc (do we remember what b.c. stands for? Go ahead, take your time.) A materialist universe means that our universe is made of physical stuff like dust and gasses. Both the materialist theory and the idealist universe are what's called a monoist theory of the universe. That means it stipulates that the universe is made of one thing, which in this case is matter. An idealist view of the universe is also a monoist theory, but it is a neutral monoist, or spiritual monoist theory. When you were arguing that our universe is a materialist universe, you probably didn't want to do that if you were trying to demonstrate the philosophy in the bible, because the idealist theory would have been a better representation of the biblical view of the universe. 


Why don't you just marinate in some of that information before we start getting into the heavy stuff, because all these liberal terms might be to much for you to handle. Maybe try and refrain from all the meth, and especially the country music while you read this. That  s h i t  kills brain cells. You're gonna need your full attention here. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanx sweet pea. Just so we're clear here, I would not ever mock people for their faith. I believe atheism and science are faith also. But I will certainly mock you for having an overwhelming misunderstanding of your supposed faith in Christianity and your purposeful misrepresentation of Christianity to fit your political ideology. Oh, and by the way, you're a       f u c k i n  RUBE!!! 

I can't believe I'm doing this but, @RickeyD, you're needed here. I was trying to have a philosophical discussion concerning Christianity, but Grafix only has an IOU for a brain cell count. Let me ask you a question. If God grants us all free will, how can we truly have free will if God knows the future is based on his plan? If we live by God's plan, how is that not a predetermined future, and how can free will exist in a predetermined existence? What does the bible say about that discrepancy?   

piloteer

@MayCaesar

What is Shintoism?

MayCaesar

@piloteer

Same as Shinto - mainstream Japanese religion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto

In this religion "gods" are essentially infinite in numbers and inhabit all entities, material and immaterial alike. Essentially they are souls of things. A car has a soul, a rock has a soul, a tree has a soul, a taste of soup has a soul, a thought has a soul, etc.

I do not really like all the collectivist elements this religion, just like any other religion, has, and certainly its foundation in fantasies is a problem - however, the rituals are cool, and the general takeaway from the religion is that we must cherish and preserve the nature, not waste our resources, tools, money, etc. Just be caring and economical. 
At the very least, visiting Shinto temples when in Japan is a must; they are very special places, and you can meet some amazing people there. Granted, most of them do not speak English, but there are ways to communicate nonetheless. Japanese are generally incredibly punctual and will try to understand you in different ways even when you do know a single common word.

Grafix

@MayCaesar - You wrote ....

Atheism is just a notion that there is no reason to believe in god. You are prescribing so many things to us... Grand conspiracies, intellectual higher ground, etc. While all we are saying is just, "I have not seen any evidence for the existence of gods you talk about".

I agree, May, that is all atheists do say and claim.  I said as much, stating their pretence of "benign nothingness" is a deception.  You just provide confirmation of that in doubling down.  I give the evidence for why and how we know it is a deception.  Digest that evidence.  Your analogy is a false equivalent, because a belief in minotaurs would need to have other clandestine activity behind it, an Agenda attached to it, as Atheism has. 

Then you just double down on your proclamation of not "caring" about other religions with no "special feelings" towards Christianity.  Your problem is May, you have already vented your anti-Christian, unbridled hatred and bigotry against Christianity all over this forum.  You have also clearly demonstrated your brotherhood with Islam, in refusing to countenance a video on Islam's atrocities.  Worse, you happily commit to text litanies of atrocities hurled against Christianity, cleaving to that fake history, like shite sticks to a blanket, but yet refuse to list a   S I N G L E  atrocity committed by Islam.  The closest you can bring yourself to that, is a vague claim that atheism acknowledges the backwardness of Islam's culture.  That's it.

You also forget you've already admitted I am right, already stated that I am and posted the image of a Shinto temple with its typically Japanese geometric Pi symbol of the Shinto Gods, when I was discussing with another commenter the Tetragrammaton, the definition of God.  You've already admitted the cultist Agenda behind atheism in that post, namely the long-term destruction of Christianity, in that same post.  Having a memory lapse?

I have never and would never type that anyone is going to burn in hell.  I strongly disagree with making such allegations for two reasons, we cannot know a person's path in advance and we cannot ever presume to see inside one's heart or soul, regarding their relationship with God, being ignorant of what demons, trials, tribulations they are struggling with.  It is none of our business to judge others spiritually and Jesus teaches that it is not, that we must never do so.  I merely state whatever I observe, together with a discernment of the influence of Satan.  What will be anyone's final end, I can never know and never presume to know.

Your post is a weak whitewash of atheism.  That's all it is.  Not a rebuttal. just another falling back into the rhetorical gutter of bitterly bashing Christianity again.  You prove you cannot restrain or control this unbridled bigotry and hatred in your very last line, after claiming in the same breath you "don't care" about religions, having no "special feelings" toward Christianity, your parting line is to bash Christianity all over again, unable to control it.
.

MayCaesar

@Grafix

You are the one who started talking about the atrocities committed by various groups in human history, and I have simply explained why your position is historically wrong. I bear no special feelings for Christianity; I do have a hard time taking religions seriously in general, and I believe that Christianity is one of the four ideologies that brought the biggest amount of misery to humankind throughout the last 2,000 years - but that does not translate to me having some negative feelings towards Christianity, or towards Christians for that matter.
You are projecting; you have a problem with the world views different from yours, and you think that everyone who disagrees with yours has the same problem with them. You are wrong. People are free to believe whatever they want, and I am okay with any beliefs; it is when they start acting on those beliefs that problems may arise.

My "brotherhood" with Islam? Just because I did not want to waste my time watching a random 45 minute long video? Okay then!
I have listed many atrocities committed by Islam: beheadings, holy wars, civil wars, totalitarian states, violation of basic human rights and especially women's rights, barbaric conquests, executions of infidels, etc. To assume that I bear some warm feelings towards this ideology would be utterly ridiculous.
Being aware of Islamic atrocities and being aware of Christian atrocities are not mutually exclusive.

Shinto and Atheism are mutually contradictory. You are right about what?

I am not whitewashing anything. Atheism is, by definition, lack of belief in gods. It does not say anything about any other beliefs you might or might not hold.

My criticism in the last line was not addressed to Christians; it was addressed to Christian fanatics. These are very different groups of people. There are atheist fanatics too out there, and the criticism applies to them as well.

Notice how you are raging and throwing curses and accusations in every comment, while I am just calmly responding. I do not need to restrain anything, because I do not bear any negative feelings towards you or your ideology. It is obvious that it is not mutual, so do not talk to me about "bigotry and hatred" and go look in the mirror instead.

Grafix

@piloteer - You pretended you wanted to debate whether or not Christianity had a philosophy, yet you have unequivocally revealed that was not and is not your intent at all.  It is now clear what you really seek to do - nothing more than the usual and typical atheist crap, namely, use and abuse my challenge to you, merely as a vehicle through which to bash me, bash Christianity and flatly deny Christianity even has a philosophy.  The stupidity of that denial, is that you live under its very philosophy every day all day, for as long as you live in any Western culture.  If you don't live in a Western culture, then you are still denying the reality, that the Western culture was built upon the very foundation of the Judeo-Christian ethos.  That ethical philosophy of Christianity gave the West its roots, its identity, its culture and its concept of law, via the Ten Commandments, five of which are enshrined in its law and another of which is enshrined in its Marriage Act, that of monogamy.

Your ignorance of this abounds, spilling that ignorance all over these pages, as you wail and writhe against it and hurl insults at Christianity, unable to understand that this great philosophy civilized more than half the world, brought to us the great classical civilization, the record of which Islam has doggedly, persistently and treacherously endeavoured to destroy for nearly 1500 years with sustained persecution, hatred, violence and slaughter endlessly waged against it.  What are they so angry about, then?  A myth?  You ignore all of that.  If this philosophy did not exist, then why are both atheism and Islam spending billions on it, day in and day out to destroy all evidence of it, to destroy every person's subscription to it?  I think you need to explain that. 

A flat denial that the Judeo-Christian ethos and moral philosophy exists cannot be accepted as an explanation, either.  It is not even an argument, is not even a rebuttal,  because this ancient and virulent ethos is on the scholarly record, spilling from history books brimming with discussions on it across  several millennia.  Will you deny them also?  A denial of its existence is a clear demonstration of abject ignorance on full display, the ignorance of atheism seared into the brain of every atheist, as ignorance must be, in order to ensure that the capture of atheism's captives is complete, otherwise they could not believe what they believe and could not follow with such conviction what they follow like a bunch of brain dead zombies.  That's the point here.  Ignorance is the flagship of atheism.

Now debate the philosophy of the Judeo-Christian ethos and its moral compass or stuff your stinking stream of bile up your back channel and bugger off.

P.S.  You are a parvenu.  You don't even use the correct terminology.  The words "materialistic", "materialist" and "materialism" can only be applied to a person, persona or attitude, not to a physical entity at all, for they express only an attitude or viewpoint, the attitude of materialism, meaning cleaving to the view that all things are derived only from that which is material.  The universe is material but neither materialistic nor materialism, because it is incapable of having an attitude.  Your entire post is self-ordained puffery, self-righteous arrogance, putrid pride and hubris, one of the seven deadly sins.  I refuse to engage it.  Now get on topic or swan off into your fake world of deluded hubris.

Grafix

@MayCaesar - You wrote ....

@Grafix  -  You are the one who started talking about the atrocities committed by various groups in human history, and I have simply explained why your position is historically wrong. I bear no special feelings for Christianity; I do have a hard time taking religions seriously in general, and I believe that Christianity is one of the four ideologies that brought the biggest amount of misery to humankind throughout the last 2,000 years - but that does not translate to me having some negative feelings towards Christianity, or towards Christians for that matter.
You are projecting; you have a problem with the world views different from yours, and you think that everyone who disagrees with yours has the same problem with them. You are wrong. People are free to believe whatever they want, and I am okay with any beliefs; it is when they start acting on those beliefs that problems may arise.

You must write lies, because the truth does not defend your position.  The evidence of who could not resist, who could not refrain from, who could not restrain and control their deep-seated proclivities, steeped in anti-Christian bigotry is already on the page, specifically who it was who opened the discussion from the very get go with Christian atrocities. Not me at all and you know it.  We have been over this May.  As already stated, the OP merely requires atheists to explain that proclivity  The OP mentions that favourite past-time of atheism not to encourage more of it, but to exhort atheists to discuss the Christian philosophy without resorting to any discussion on atrocities.  Did you do that?  Did any atheist in here do that?  Not a one.  It   V I N D I C A T E S  my position as you do in every breath.

Then you claim you have no brotherhood with Islam, but yet refuse to watch these videos of new information recently translated concerning the extent, the depth and breadth of its appalling history, nothing like it on earth, truly the depths of depravity.  Why do you refuse to learn of this history? You claimed you are history-literate with a strong interest in it.  Apparently you lie again.  The time you have spent writing drivel on these pages trebbles that which it would take to inform yourself watching a 45 minute video, a cheap, quick and informative lesson in history, but are you interested?  No.  Why not?  For all the reasons already stated.

You are whitewashing atheism.  It is what you are brainwashed to do.  It is by necessity, otherwise you could not cleave to it.  It is ignorance on steroids and intended to be so.  Your excuses are too late and duplicitous.  Your unbridled hatred, fanatical fettish and deep-seated insidious bigotry toward Christianity is already well-documented by you in these pages.  Too late, May.  Sorry.  I call you out for it.
.

Grafix

Deleted and re-posted with a more complete explanation.

Grafix

@piloteer - [Edited with a more complete explanation.]  Below, you simply repeat the same question, presented in a different way.  It has already been answered, yet you follow up with this dumb act ....

If God grants us all free will, how can we truly have free will if God knows the future is based on his plan? If we live by God's plan, how is that not a predetermined future, and how can free will exist in a predetermined existence? What does the bible say about that discrepancy?   

1.  You did not read the properly explained definition of God's plan and cleave to your erroneous, atheistic-inculcated definition, seared into your brain and apparently immovable. I warned you of that.

2.  It is necessary to understand the correct definition.  Go read it again.  Without that understanding you will always persist with this same dumb question.

3.  As explained, fore-knowledge does not need to be bolted to any control of the future.  God's foreknowledge is a hands-off approach from controlling the future of each of us, which we all determine for ourselves through his gift of free will.

4.  As already explained, God's final approach  to our choices which we make of our own free will, with no control over those ever wielded at all by Him, is on our own heads, wrought by us.

5.  As already explained, God only controls the consequences, punishing those who defy Him.  That punishment is reserved until the Day of Judgement.  However, if our iniquity becomes so great, then He may take control of the consequences and punish us before our time, wiping out our dens of iniquity, destroying entire cities, or entire nations, as prophesied in the Biblical texts and each prophesy already fulfilled - the destruction of Babylon, of Jerusalem and its Temple, of Damascus, of the five cities, including Sodom and Gomorrah, of the Canaanites, of the Moabites, of Jericho, the Great Flood, on and on, all historical, all prophesied, all fulfilled.

6.  The final  judgement of all of those souls who met their premature death will be at the same time as those of us who went to our deaths in timely manner.  Our bodies will be resurrected in the flesh to face that judgement, standing before the entire world and the entire bench of Judges in God's Heavenly realm, for all to see, our unrepented sins revealed to all, to our Mothers, our Fathers, our siblings, our friends and relatives, our own children, our wives, our husbands, etc.  Woe betide he/she who refused to repent before meeting his/her death, our shame of such unrepented sins to be our burden into eternity, that unbearable shame synonymous with Hell.

7.  In isaiah, the prophet tells that God will deliver the Hebrews from Babylon, controlling none of it, but by simply doing what He always does, razing to the ground those among His enemies who have taken their earthly transgressions a step too far in defiance of Him.  Isaiah is preaching that fact, that God will do so via a conqueror from the East - Cyrus, the King of Persia, (Iran).  Cyrus conquered the Hebrews' enemies, released them from their enslavement in Babylon and allowed them to return to Israel.  Cyrus even advised them to build walled cities, in order to protect themselves against their enemies and so Jerusalem became a walled city..

8.  So what is the nature of this God and how does he ensure that He defeats Satan in the final Armageddon?  Simply by destroying Satan's army of agents on earth, whenever they become too strong, He always controlling the condemnation of our actions, of that which we have already chosen to do through our free will.  It is a control of the consequences not any pre-determined control of our already chosen actions via our free will.

I already explained all of this to you.  The interpretation likewise already explained it to you.  Now go away and quit denying that which is already written on the page, otherwise you need your head read.